Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

Suck On THIS, Democrats! [Dan Collins]

I’m happier than you are, schmuck!  How do you like them apples?

Most studies show that wealthy people are marginally happier than poor ones. People with pets or children are no happier than those without. People with active sex lives are — surprise! — happier than those without. No single morsel of happiness data, though, is more intriguing than this: Republicans are happier than Democrats.

A 2006 Pew Research poll found that 45 percent of Republicans describe themselves as “very happy,” compared with only 30 percent of Democrats (and 29 percent of independents). This is a sizable gap and a remarkably consistent one, too. Republicans have been happier than Democrats every year since the General Social Survey, conducted biannually by the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago, began asking about happiness in 1972.

What did you say? McCain? I’m STILL happier than you, loser. (h/t Good Glenn)
 

91 Replies to “Suck On THIS, Democrats! [Dan Collins]”

  1. nishizonoshinji says:

    lulz im still a registered republican.
    but i think ill be happier as a democrat.
    it will cleanse me of the “bioethics” council.
    ;)

  2. RDub says:

    Well…yeah. I’m confident in my own ability to get things done, don’t spend an inordinate amount of time worrying about how I can “help” people who are able to help themselves and use reason and logic to deal with situations rather than swooning onto my fainting couch everytime life is “unfair” or something unexpected happens. Not to say each and every Democrat is that way, but sometimes generalizations are quite useful.

    May not play out that way for everyone but I can’t complain.

  3. B Moe says:

    Take a look at the lefts positions on genetic engineering everywhere else before you commit, nishi:
    http://tinyurl.com/248ela
    other than humans, it is frowned upon. Go independent if you are truly seeking cleanliness.

  4. JHoward says:

    Feets?

  5. I dunno, some Republicans are so competetive I could almost wonder if they inflated their happiness scores when asked to self report.

  6. Timstigator says:

    How can you possibly be happy when your heart bleeds so?

    Sniff sniff…the only thing we can do is to spend more of your money to make my heart break less.

  7. happyfeet says:

    I’m not sure how it can be really all that intriguing after 35 years or whatever. If they don’t have the variables in their questionnaire that explain it then they need to ask better questions, not sit around being all intrigued. Maybe they need more better softwares.

  8. nishizonoshinji says:

    oh….im sry i forgot to say SES (socioeconomic status) is prolly the hidden variable.
    more poor ppl are democrats.
    useless study.

  9. nishizonoshinji says:

    more poor ppl and ppl of low social standing that is.
    SES.
    google it.

  10. happyfeet says:

    Actually, really, why are Democrats so miserable is the question, and really I don’t think it’s all that enigmatic. The Democrats pitch their message to miserable people, and attract them. The Republicans pitch their message to resonate with happy people, and they attract them. It’s not isolated variables cause the messaging of each party is based on multivariate composite targets.

  11. B Moe says:

    So ignorance isn’t bliss after all. Who knew?

  12. B Moe says:

    If they don’t have the variables in their questionnaire that explain it then they need to ask better questions, not sit around being all intrigued.

    Heh.

  13. Dan Collins says:

    Hahahahaha! I’m using way more than my share of the Earth’s finite supply of happiness, and I don’t care. Not a jot. Not a tittle.

  14. serr8d says:

    Dunno, nishiz, seems some of those with low social standing are intriguingly happy.

  15. Education Guy says:

    This study makes me sad. Oh wait, no it doesn’t.

    (cue evil laughter)

  16. Taisa says:

    I wonder how much of that correlates with religiosity?
    I’ve read that church-going types are happier on average.

  17. SarahW says:

    Well, truth be told I’m feeling somwhat surly. It could be the McCainy-ness talking.

  18. thor says:

    Time to slather some Miracle Whip on some white toast, Sarah. This just in – McCain wins Virginia!

  19. happyfeet says:

    What the data is showing now, remember, is that anytime a constellation of variables produces an “unhappy” respondent, that person is more likely than the average person to be a Democrat.

    So basically they have the data to show on a univariate basis what variables they collect are more likely to correspond with happy or unhappy respondents. That’s easy (think of putting “happy” in the column of your spreadsheet and putting all the variables in the rows… in the intersection you mark how many peeps were both happy and xyz) … if they want to figure out the constellations, I guess they need to hire someone cause they sound stoopid, but there are formula thingers for that.

    What is really important to remember is that even on a univariate basis, the most significant variables for each condition could be entirely different, meaning, just cause poor people are miserable doesn’t mean rich people are happy.

    What I think is that they can do a better analysis than they’re offering here they just choose not to cause they are suckass little Pew propaganda monkeys.

  20. Sticky B says:

    Republicans have been happier than Democrats every year since the General Social Survey, conducted biannually by the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago, began asking about happiness in 1972.

    Well Hell Yeah Democrats have never been happy. Can you point to even one year during this time period that the median corporate and personal income tax rates were both above 90%? No? Then what the hell do Dems have to be happy about? Do I have to explain everything around here?

  21. Great Mencken's Ghost says:

    Hell, I switched to the GOP just to be happier. Oy, did I pick the wrong primary seasons.

    Reason number googleth to be pissed at McCain; he’s harshing my mellow…

  22. thor says:

    On the ticker at the bottome of the screen they called DC for Obama with 0% of the vote reporting. Somewhere out there there’s one female Democrat running for President whose calves just tightened up.

  23. happyfeet says:

    I’m really glad Hick lost in Virginia. Cause I hate him is why.

  24. thor says:

    High five, Feets, then some lo skin, now on the side. It’s time for the Huckmiester to suck on his Budweiser.

  25. JD says:

    The Dems are fucking misery pimps. Just listen to their campaign speeches. College is expensive. applause. people are losing their homes. applause. no health insurance. applause. old peopke are dying. applause. children abused. applause. Maybe the alleged hopeyness of Barry O is making a difference in their collective psyche.

  26. JD says:

    Cause I hate him is why. Ditto.

  27. datadave says:

    u should be happy, happy…

    anyway. I like this thread, Dan! You gotcha us Demo-glums. Yupp.

    U know all the shit about the reality based “liberals” getting a smack-down from the Bush Regime and a certain member of the 4th Reich told a librul: “(We don’t have to worry about what you liberals think as…) “We create our own reality.”

    I love Public radio as today on Radiolab they had this cool show that maybe opened my mind to the value of lying. Like Mose Allison had these great lyrics in a great song:”How much Honesty can a man stand?” And the goofs at radiolab come up with a possible reason that Republicans are more happy: Self deception and swimming. Apparently Liars do better and are happier…that knowledge will help me when I file taxes in the next few days. Yippee!

    A

  28. happyfeet says:

    Hillary’s doing that right now on the NPR. She needs a better sound guy. When she tries to talk at volume she sounds just goofy. Even worse when she tries to sound like real people. Bless her heart. She’s really just such a dorky little thing.

  29. happyfeet says:

    Oh. That was at #25.

  30. Dan Collins says:

    You sound pretty happy, dave. Not.

  31. MC says:

    “misery pimps” – you got it JD. I was watching this HBO thing on Abu Ghraib the other night – had a bunch of whiners sitting around saying “They brought them in and made them go naked” OMG!, “Made them stand around with their hands in the air” OMG!, “Made loud noises so they couldn’t sleep” OMG!, “Played Cindy Lauper (or whatever) at loud levels” OMG!

    Never broke the skin that I heard tell.

    I kept thinking they should put the whiners in a cell with one of those naked guys – give the naked guy a knife – at least he’d be happy.

  32. thor says:

    Sean Hannity just asked Karl Rove, “so in Hillary’s campaign, is Hillary the problem?” That’s called adjusting the T-Ball stand so it’s just the right height.

  33. nishizonoshinji says:

    yawn
    they cud have used multidimensional scaling or nonparametrics.
    i cud do the experimental design.
    this is a classic phillipine toaster test the way it is
    in the 70s….
    the phillipine govt wanted to implement reduced family size, so they did a survey
    the highest negative correlate with family size was number of electronic devices
    so in theory…..u cud implement birthcontrol in the phillipines by giving out toasters.
    there are hidden variables
    like SES

  34. nishizonoshinji says:

    i believe it was christina aguilerra, not lauper

  35. nishizonoshinji says:

    yah feets.she is basically unlikeable
    and her appearance…
    those gawdawful pantsuits…..
    euwwwwwww

  36. cynn says:

    thor: That was funny!

  37. JD says:

    happyfeets – I was listening to that as well. The lack of self awareness is painful in that group.

  38. cynn says:

    … But it’s inappropriate because it besmirches the Dems. Wise up.

  39. JD says:

    Sean Hannity just asked Karl Rove, “so in Hillary’s campaign, is Hillary the problem?”

    That is quite possibly the biggest softball, most hangingest slider, most ridiculously simple question I have ever seen. Rove, you magnificent bastard.

  40. nishizonoshinji says:

    obama is speaking now….mad inspirational.
    the little hairs on standin up on the back of my neck.
    in my graduate level Artificial Intelligence class we had a sayin…
    Representation is all.

    Obama represents.
    ;)

  41. cynn says:

    Accepting this poll data (which might be dated), Repubs are happier than Dems on the basis of wealth, power, marriage, and ignorance. Interesting that all those qualities are mutable. Some of the issues Dems hawk are wealth, power, marriage and ignorance. We simply have no traction there; so the pubs are all happy happy joy joy.

  42. fahs ibair says:

    Socioeconomic Status? Variables? Poor people/non-voters trend Democrat? I think you are on to something here. Maybe you should put the Math/CE stuff away for a bit. Focus on Poly-Sci. Groundbreaking stuff.

  43. cynn says:

    Yes, the Democrats are the trashy party. And by party, I mean wake.

  44. TmjUtah says:

    I just spent two hours with youngest goddess (14 ’til the end of the month) repairing equipment and props used by her Winter Guard drill team.

    I now know about her secret plan to spring a combination clog/stomp routine at her high school talent show.

    She learned what a Japanese saw is, and how to avoid the unpleasantness of binding dowel pins.

    We both figured out that ninety psi is a bit much for a brad nailer hitting particle board with crappy reinforcing strips.

    My knees are killing me – tears in my eye, nauseous, killing me. All those folks who said “you’ll pay for THAT…” were absolutely, positively right, and I really should go look up the ones still paying taxes and send them a card or something.

    I’m the happiest guy on the planet right now.

    I honestly don’t know how much of a Republican I might be anymore; they seem to have gone down their own fork in the trail. If I were to wake up a Democrat tomorrow, well, I’ve got a spiffy heavy duty shower curtain rod and any number of crappy thin ties I could use…

  45. Heather says:

    there are hidden variables
    like SES

    Well, if you read it, they controlled for income, so “economic” isn’t “hidden”. (Dems on average have more money than GOPers on average, anyway.)

    I think it’s your attitude on what you feel the world owes you vs. what you think you can accomplish. But I just press buttons for a living.

  46. nishizonoshinji says:

    heather….SES
    its the blue collar thing..not just income

  47. nishizonoshinji says:

    SES is not just economic…
    social status…education..white vs blue collar…it is a mixed variable

  48. happyfeet says:

    SES also changes geographically I think, no?

  49. JD says:

    Someone is relying on stereotypes of Republicans again, nishi. You can do better than that.

  50. Education Guy says:

    One possibility for this may be that Democrats look to the government to solve their problems and are consistently disappointed, while Republicans tend to believe that individuals are best suited to solve their own problems, and then go about doing it.

  51. mlcoe says:

    BTW Heather according to the same Pew research people Dems are overall less educated and less wealthy than Republicans.

    http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?
    PageID=750

  52. nishizonoshinji says:

    lulz edu-guy how to measure that?

    right feets SES is a composite variable

    JD ima republican, member?
    rawr

  53. B Moe says:

    lulz edu-guy how to measure that?

    If you must have a numerical representation, notice the trends on your paycheck stubs. Depending of course, if you are in the SES that has those.

  54. JD says:

    Nishi

    JD ima republican, member?

    Your self identification is really not an issue here. You are basing your assumptions on stereotypes of SES, which do not comport with real world numbers. Not very scientific, grasshopper.

  55. dicentra says:

    Depression/pessimism is often the result of learned helplessness, where you are convinced that you have no control over your situation and that all effort is futility. It is usually the result of having several serious factors in your childhood that were out of your control, such as battling parents, divorcing parents, abusive parents, living in a war zone, etc.

    Optimism/happiness comes from believing that no matter how bad it gets, you can still do something about it, or that there’s still some aspect of your life–however small–that’s under your control.

    From an economic standpoint, those who believe that they have the power and/or opportunity to improve their financial situations are happier than those who believe that they’re stuck and there’s nothing they can do.

    This applies equally to the rich and the poor: it’s not how much money you have, it’s whether you believe you can get more, or at least continue to get enough, that determines your happiness level.

    So Education Guy is on the right track: if you’re dependent on government for your happiness, you feel helpless over your situation.

    That’s why fascism is so popular with the unhappy masses: they finally feel Hope that things will get better…

    …without their having to do anything, because they believe that their efforts were futile to begin with.

    Kinda sad, really.

  56. Topsecretk9 says:

    Remember the KOS diarist who blamed Bush for the crack-up of her marriage? Or was it weight gain? Liberals are always pissed off at something and need to place blame for their own lame choices. Also, being pissed helps them feel like part of a “movement”. The big, unhappy, pissed off family of “movement”.

  57. JD says:

    TSK9 – Or in this case, a bowel movement.

  58. daleyrocks says:

    I like it when nishi slips out of character and writes almost like a real person. Hai Karate!

  59. Topsecretk9 says:

    JD

    I thought – Comment by JD on 2/12 @ 8:06 pm #- was right on. Wallow and applaud misery speech.

    They also have a tendency to exaggerate excessively (or intentionally lie) circumstances. It’s like misery masturbation for them.

  60. JD says:

    dicentra and TSK9 – You are onto something there, and I agree with the notion that if you are placing your well being in the hands of others like the nanny-staters aspire to do, then it is less likely for you to be happy. People, at their core, desire individuality, and self determination. Handing that over to another person, or another entity, leaves no alternative other than to be a drain on your soul.

    But, that is not sufficient. In the end, there is an added layer of hopelessness for these people. The Dems promise and promise and promise and promise, when the simple reality is that despite decades of promises made, few have been kept, and the few that have been kept, did not work out so well for the people. Let’s take the poor. For decades, the Dems have been waging war on the poor, or against being poor, or something like that. I suspect that nobody, including the poor, believes them any more. Yet come election time, there they are, pimping out the misery of the poor, promising to eliminate the poor, job training, education, whatever the BS promise of the day is. In the end, these people know, given the decades of failure, that even when their people are in office, their lives are not going to be any better unless they do something about it, not the government.

    But, it is late. I could be wrong.

  61. happyfeet says:

    I saw this at Tim Blair’s site…

    Obama said America needs to end its addiction to foreign oil. The burning of all this oil, he said, is helping to melt polar ice. “We are going to cap the greenhouse gases that cause global warming,” he told his audience in Baltimore. “We are going to take some of the money that’s generated from fining polluters, and we are going to spend billions of dollars on solar, wind and biodiesel. We will hire young people who don’t have a trade and give them a trade making homes more energy efficient, insulating homes, changing light bulbs, reducing our dependence on dirty power plants.”

    I don’t think I would want a professional light bulb changer like in my house. That doesn’t sound at all like a very hopey career path I don’t think.

  62. happyfeet says:

    oh. Here for Tim.

  63. JD says:

    We are going to take some of the money that’s generated from fining polluters, and we are going to spend billions of dollars on solar, wind and biodiesel.

    So this will be self-funded by fines?

  64. hey, I’d do it if it means I get a chain saw

  65. MC says:

    aguilerra? OMG! The torture!

  66. Rusty says:

    I dunno Cynn. Annoying you makes me happy. Does that count?

    Represents what? neisei. We’d all like the answer to that question. Unless he lets Che speak for him.

  67. Slartibartfast says:

    u cud implement birthcontrol in the phillipines by giving out toasters

    That’s the most asinine thing I’ve read in the last few weeks, and that includes everything datadave’s written in that time.

    Admirable, really, in some sense.

  68. Rob Crawford says:

    U know all the shit about the reality based “liberals” getting a smack-down from the Bush Regime and a certain member of the 4th Reich told a librul: “(We don’t have to worry about what you liberals think as…) “We create our own reality.”

    Oddly, this incident has never actually been confirmed, yet it’s an article of faith on the left. Personally, I find it hilarious that people declare themselves “reality based” on the basis of a thin piece of agit-prop created from whole cloth.

  69. Mikey NTH says:

    I dunno Slart. It’s pretty ridiculous, true; but I think old datadave has taken more hits to the head than nishi has. (See dd’s comment above.) Nishi is just playing a game, trying to out feet happyfeet, but can’t quite pull it off.

  70. datadave says:

    Crawford, it’s maybe an ‘urban myth’ but true none-the-less. You know liberals actually talk to conservatives once in awhile. I see the conservatives posturing all the time….like “mission accomplished” and aren’t we so righteous.

    another proven myth: war protesters spitting on returning Vets from Vietnam. Never happened but even Obama mentioned that negative myth in his book. Even he ‘bought’ it. So it most be true(?). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Spitting_Image

    well, think about it. How long would some hippy survive if he’d actually spat on a battle hardened soldier just getting off the plane? It was mostly peace and love for the soldiers if anything. Another myth is dispelled too in that Nam vets have actually done better than the general public from that era…like Bob Kerry and his fitness salons making him a millionaire.

  71. Education Guy says:

    In a sick sort of way it’s funny that everything you think you know is wrong dave.

  72. Hillary says:

    Wickipedia says it, datadave believes it. How old are you? It was not peace and love for returning vets.

  73. BJTexs says:

    dataless dave should read the whole article if he’s going to go all Wiki on us:

    Yet the recently uncovered evidence of contemporaneous accounts of spitting have forced Lembke to retreat from his more extreme prior claims, such as: “The truth is that nobody spat on Vietnam veterans.” [6] Now Lembke appears to acknowledge that there likely were some incidents of actual spitting.

    Data is your friend, dave!

  74. Rob Crawford says:

    another proven myth: war protesters spitting on returning Vets from Vietnam.

    If by “proven” you mean “proven to be true”.

    Really, asshat, you haven’t been paying attention the last, oh, ten years or so, have you?

    As for the origin of “reality based community” — who said it? Come up with the name of the person who supposedly said it, or at least admit the possibility it’s a complete fabrication.

    (Of course, davey probably thinks Dan Rather got a raw deal.)

  75. Rob Crawford says:

    In a sick sort of way it’s funny that everything you think you know is wrong dave.

    I’m amazed he can maintain his losing streak. You’d think he’d get something right someday.

  76. B Moe says:

    I’m amazed he can maintain his losing streak. You’d think he’d get something right someday.

    You might think that at first, but stuff like this:

    Crawford, it’s maybe an ‘urban myth’ but true none-the-less.

    Make it easy to believe after a bit.

  77. Slartibartfast says:

    Can we get a program to emulate datadave? I suggest a template for his comments can be something like:

    [Tedious, uninteresting, yet folksy apropos-of-nothing-at-all anecdote](optional)
    [Tendentiously insulting generalization about right-wingers]
    [Transparent self-aggrandizement]
    [Ridiculously incorrect claim of fact]
    [Some horseshit philosophizing or other]

    There might be other components that I’ve missed. Anyone interested?

  78. Jeff G. says:

    I’d throw in something that butchers syntax and spelling. But then, I’m all about form, I’ve been told. So maybe somebody else should take the credit — you know, to provide me with some cover.

  79. alppuccino says:

    [Another mildly different reason for not working today]

  80. datadave says:

    Meatheads, read this: http://www.harpers.org/archive/2006/06/0081080

    same old lies: spitting on soldiers: ““very young boys, degenerate deserters, and prostitutes tore the insignia off our best front line soldiers and spat on their field gray uniforms.” ja, who said that?

    back to the happiness factor. Kudos to Dan: NPR seems to be reading his blog: the uupside of being down

    slart, that’s a good one… thx for the criticism. I am glad you’re enjoying it. “Oh, so happy, oh, so happy, I am happy, I am happy, I am Gay..,…” Not, as Dan says, meaning the gay part. But it is snowing, snowing, snowing.

  81. datadave says:

    maggie, that’s a good one! Yeah, they should be forced to cut the trees as they are infringing on their neighbors. Like do you put up a 30 foot wall in the cul-de-sac neighborhood? http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_8063034

    I know u think u’re so ironic… I guess they’re all liberals?

    just means the world’s getting better after all. At least both sides in the dispute care about the environment…but redwoods in a dinky suburban lot aren’t exactly proper landscape trees.

    crawfish, go back to work. You taxing u’r self here.

  82. JD says:

    data – Those blotter sheets are not your friend.

  83. datadave says:

    http://www.dynafit.de/movies/mustagh_ata_eng_download.wmv
    JD. still telemking when there’s gear like that? ? u seem to know the ‘acid’ more than me.

  84. Rob Crawford says:

    same old lies: spitting on soldiers: ““very young boys, degenerate deserters, and prostitutes tore the insignia off our best front line soldiers and spat on their field gray uniforms.” ja, who said that?

    Resorting to argumentum ad Hitlerum so quickly?

    And why are you ignoring that the Wikipedia article you referenced concedes it actually happened?

  85. Slartibartfast says:

    That’s sweet, dave. I mean, it’s not quite like comparing right-wingers to Nazis, is it?

  86. datadave says:

    it said “Might”
    have happened…Okay, jack…give me links and names. In fact the reference of maybe it happened was in fact same author saying it didn’t happen:

    “Stories of spat-upon Vietnam veterans are bogus. Born out of accusations made by the Nixon administration, they were enlivened in popular culture (recall Rambo saying he was spat on by those maggots at the airport) and enhanced in the imaginations of Vietnam-generation men — some veterans, some not. The stories besmirch the reputation of the anti-war movement and help construct an alibi for why we lost the war: had it not been for the betrayal by liberals in Washington and radicals in the street, we could have defeated the Vietnamese. The stories also erase from public memory the image, discomforting to some Americans, of Vietnam veterans who helped end the carnage they had been part of.”

    No references avail. and now the same wingnut crowd is making it up again in that article http://www.vvaw.org/veteran/article/?id=350 Can’t give me any reality of spitting on Nam soldiers, can ya? willful ignorance isn’t an argument.

    but let’s stay on the happiness thread, will’s ya?

    I was thinking about that auto bat post writn’ idea, too. Slart.

    >g

  87. from comments at the Countercolumn link:

    Jim Lindgren at the Volokh Conspiracy, http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2007_01_28-2007_02_03.shtml#1170519427 ,has suggested an innocent (if not terribly competent) explanation for the denial:

    Then Jerry Lembcke wrote a book saying it [spitting on veterans] was a myth, that he researched news stories and they started appearing around 1980. I have no independent source of information on this, but having done literally thousands of WESTLAW and LEXIS/NEXIS searches, I can say that when something starts appearing in the press in the early 1980s, that is almost always a function of when these two news services started including the full texts of major newspapers. (I find a clear Feb. 1, 1981 reference in the New York Times.) Although I can’t say for certain that Jerry Lembcke made this error in his research, I can say that my students make this error all the time. I haven’t yet read either Greene’s or Lembke’s book, but in my experience when someone says that a word usage or a story starts appearing around 1980 or in the early 1980s, they are almost always reflecting the limitations of their online search database, rather than the origins of the phenomenon they are tracing.
    # posted by Blogger Roger Sweeny : 1:24 PM

  88. Slartibartfast says:

    Lembke sounds like a spitting-on-soldiers denialist.

    I can go that way too. Global warming…it’s never been recorded on camera, now, has it?

  89. datadave says:

    this is more accurate, Maggie..thx for the link”

    “I know many, many Viet Nam veterans. To think they would have skulked off when a protester spit on them defies logic and human nature. They were able to give back three times what they got. If such things happened why did the Veterans walk away?

    When a nut told Neal Armstrong he lied about landing on the Moon, Armstrong punched him, and this was when Armstrong was an old man. What benefit is there to saying soldiers were spit on and helplessly slithered off?

    You may think that the story shows how bad liberals are, but most people know liberals and cannot imagine them spitting on anyone, but most people know veterans and believe like I do that the spitter would have found himself, or herself if you imagine it was done by women, shoved head first into the nearest garbage can.

    Our differences are real enough without inventing pity parties for people who stood up for themselves in Viet Nam and elsewhere.
    # posted by Anonymous Tom Joyce : 5:34 P”

    from my experience some veterans incensed with the unfairness of what they went through wanted to punch a few longhairs and made up the spittn’ excuse to go at it…but to think spittn’ happened even a little bit defies credulity…unless ur so enamored with the holier-than-thou chauvinistic Black Flag bunch of crazed losers..who still want to nuk Nam or Iraq?

    yeah, slart….there are lots of pictures of the wide open arctic ocean never seen by centuries of eskimos. They do have a long oral history…going back to their passage across to Bering Strait from Siberia…like maybe 12000 years ago. (they don’t tell accurate time though, no calenders or watches).

    But let’s be happy at least in Utah and Vermont it is a good snow year amongst several not-so-good years.

  90. Rob Crawford says:

    Uh, datadave, that guy you’re quoting — the one so positive a trained soldier would assault someone for spitting on them? He’s not all that bright.

    It wasn’t Armstrong, it was Aldrin. And now you’re resorting to “argument from incredulity”. Most importantly, ignoring the first-hand accounts from multiple people.

    yeah, slart….there are lots of pictures of the wide open arctic ocean never seen by centuries of eskimos. They do have a long oral history…going back to their passage across to Bering Strait from Siberia…like maybe 12000 years ago.

    *sigh*

    No, they don’t. No one has an oral history that encompasses 12,000 years. They may have myths and legends, but they’re no more valid than the Greek myths of cyclops and hippogriffs.

Comments are closed.